On 11/28/2013 09:42 AM, Joerg Stephan wrote:
When i talk to developers, they dont want to switch to newer upstream versions every 18 months. No application lifecycle can handle this.
But the question here is, are applications that we do not build in OBS part of our target?
If those applications are open source, they possibly should be part of our target, then why are they not in OBS?
What does it take to get those companies/developers to build their application in OBS? From what i've found with the open source projects i follow and package for which are generally smaller projects, they tend to take the view
On 11/30/2013 11:08 PM, Robert Schweikert wrote: that there is alot of Linux Distro's and it is to much effort for them to package for all of them so they take the approach that packaging is a job for distributions / volunteers there generally happy to help with issues etc, but packaging is the job of the distro, or someone who uses the distro and the program enough that they want to package it
Once open source applications build in OBS the life cycle discussion goes away, for developers; and to a certain degree for users as well. For developers the app is build in OBS and is always integrated with the "latest and greatest", thus handling change, which is incremental but frequent becomes a small effort compared to handling the accumulated set of changes at every release. For users the life cycle becomes somewhat immaterial as the application has already been tested on the release as it was part of the development process.
When it comes to proprietary applications I am not certain we should care. I do plenty of that w.r.t. my $DAYJOB and let me tell you, it's not pretty and no life cycle is slow enough for proprietary app developers not even the SLES life cycle of almost no changes for eternity.
Simon -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-project+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, email: opensuse-project+owner@opensuse.org